…Why the Polling Agent must be firm
This report outlines issues on election day regarding Recount, Endorsement on rejected ballot paper without official mark, Decision of Retuning Officer on ballot paper and Recording of poll, Result forms to be signed and counter signed, Certificate of Return and Forms for use at elections.
Last week, we examined why, even with the celebrated Electoral Act 2022, there are reasons it is not yet uhuru in the electoral sphere. We explained why Nigerians should be watchful and committed to following through on citizen activism in order to ensure that provisions of the Act are strictly followed with a view to having free, fair and credible elections next year.
In that report (one of many series to come) we presented some salient sections of the Electioral Act which should chart pathways to a process devoid of foul play. The sections included, for instance, Sections 43, 47 and 60. Section 43 makes provision regarding the responsibilities of the Polling Agents and the added powers bestowed on them pursuant to ensuring afree, fair and credible election. For Section 47, every voter must (mandatorilly) be accredited with the use of Bimodal Accreditation system machine (BVAS) for verification and confirmation of the voter (biometrics) and, in the unlikely failure, then facial identification comes into play. This is why its called biomodal. All these must be witnessed by party/candidates agents, seated at the polling units to observe the proceedings. This has put an end to the use of incident forms used for rigging. If a voter cannot be confirmed with the BVAS, such voter will be asked to leave the voting arena immediately. Section 60 spells out what the Presiding Officer is expected to do concerning counting of votes, signing and stamping of the forms, announcement of results at the Polling Unit and the penalty for a Presiding Officer who contravenes the Act. Section60(6) states: A Presiding Officer who wilfully contravenes any provision of this section commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not more than N500,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least six months”.
Exposing the dangers of the litigations being surreptitiously filed by some people to ambush the use of BVAS, reference was made to how the June 12, 1993, presidential election was annulled. It started with a group, Association for Better Nigeria, ABN, led by Chief Francis Arthur Nzeribe and one Abimbola Davies.
They filed an interlocutory application and ‘final judgment’ was given at 9pm, Thursday, June 10, 1993, by Justice Basey Ikpeme – just some 36 hours to the election. Although the National Electoral Commission, NEC, as it was then known, promptly issued a statement, disregarding the court order, and stating that the election would go on as scheduled, the deed was already done. Confusion rented the air. NEC filed a counter-affidavit that the jurisdiction of the court had been ousted by Section 19(1) of Decree 13 of 1993. It did not only hold the election as scheduled but also started releasing the results”. But on June 23, 1993, the election was annuled. Nigeria is yet to recover. In late August of this year, the spokes person for the Coference of United Political Parties, CUPP, Barr. Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere, made some startling revelations on how some politicians were already piling pressure on the leadership of INEC to compromise next year’s elections. Outlandish as some have described some of this claims, including a court process instituted to stop the use of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, BVAS, the Chairman of INEC, Prof. Mahmoud Yakubu, has addressed some of the issue Ugochinyere raised and assured of a smooth process.
For next year’s election, INEC would deploy to 176,846 Polling Units and a total of 1.4million staff would be activated.
The election, according to INEC, is going to cost N305billion. More than 80,000 vehicles would be deployed for distribution of sensitive and non-sensitive materials across the country. Boats, for the riverine areas would be provided by the commission.
With this logistical burden – human, material and vehicular – next year’s election is a make or mar one for Nigeria. Which is why every effort shoud not be spared in getting it right. Below are some other critical sections of the Electoral Act 2022 which Nigerians must be familiar with.
Section 61 (Recount)
A candidate or a Polling Agent may, where present at a Polling Unit when counting of votes is completed by the Presiding Officer, demand to have the votes recounted provided that the Presiding Officer shall cause the votes to be so recounted, only once (the Polling Agent has a right but should not abuse it more than once)
Section 64 (endorsement on rejected ballot paper without official mark)
(1) The Presiding Officer shall endorse the word ‘rejected’ on the ballot paper rejected under Section 52 (1) of this Act and for any other reason, and the ballot papers shall not be counted except otherwise allowed by the Retruning Officer who may overrule the Presiding Officer
(2) If any objection to the decision of a Presiding Officer to reject a ballot paper is raised by a candidate or a Polling Agent at the time the decision is made, the Presiding Officer shall add to the word ‘rejected’ then, the phrase ‘but objected to’
(3) The Presiding Officer shall prepare a statement on rejected ballot papers, stating the number rejected, the reason for rejection and their serial number, and he /she shall, on request, allow a candidate or a PA to copy the statement.
(4) A Collation Officer or Returning Officer at an election shall collate and anniunce the result of an election, subject to his/her verification and confirmation that the –
a. number of acredited voters stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from PU under Section 47 (2) of this Act;
b. The votes stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from the Polling Units under Section 60(4) of this Act
(5) Subject to subsection (1), a Collation Officer or Returning Officer shall use the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from Polling Unitss under Section 47(2) of this Act and the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from the PUs under Section 60(4) of this Act to collate and announce the result of an election if a collated result at his or a lower level of collation is not correct
(6) Where during collation of results, there is a dispute regarding a collated result or the result of an election from any Polling Unit, the Collation Officer or Returning Officer shall use the following to determine the correctness of the disputed result –
a. the original of thedisputed collated result for each Polling Unit where the election is disputed;
b. the Smart Card Reader or other technology(ical) device used for accreditation of voters in each PU where the election is disputed for the purpose of obtaining accreditation data directly from the Smart Card Reader or technology9ical) devise;
c. data of accreditation recorded and transmitted directly from each Polling Unit where the election is disputed as prescribed under Section 47(2) of this Act; and
d. the votes and results of the election recorded and transmitted directly from each Polling Unit where the election is disputed as prescribed under Section 60(4) of this Act
(7) If the disputed result under subsection (6) were otherwise found not to be correct, the Collation Officer or Returning Officer shall re-collate and announce a new result using the information in subsection (6)(a)-(d)
(8) Where the dispute under subsection (6) arose at the level ofcollation and the RO has satisfied the provision of subsection (6)(a)-(d), the Returning Officer shall accordingly declare the winner of the election
(9) A Returning Officer or Collation Officer, as the case may be, commits an offence if he/she intentionally collates or announces a false result and is liable on conviction to a fine of N5,000,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least three years or both
Section 65 (Decision of Returning Officer on ballot paper)
(1) The decision of the Returning Officer shall be final on any question arising or relatingto –
a. Unmarked ballot paper
b. Rejected ballot paper; and
c. Declaration of scrores of candidates and the return of a candidate
Provided that the Commission shall have the power within 7days to review the declaration and return where the Commission determines that the said declaration and return was not made voluntarily or was made contrary to the provisions of the law, regulations and guidelines and manual for the election.
(2) A decision of the Returning Officer under sub section (1) may be reviewed by an election tribunal or court of competent jurisdiction in an election petition proceedings under this Act
Section 70 (Step-by-step recording of poll)
Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Commission shall issue and publish in the FGgazette, guidelines for the election, which shall make provisions, among other things, for the step-by-step recording of the poll in the electoral forms as may be prescribed beginning from the Polling Unit to the last collation centre for the wrad or constituency where the result of the election shall be declared.
Section 71 (Result forms to be signed and counter signed)
Every result form completed at the ward, local government, state and national levels in accordance with the provisions of this Act or any guidelines issued by the Commission shall be stamped, signed and countersigned by the relevant officers and polling agents at those levels and copies given to the police officers and the polling agents where available.
Section 72 (Certificate of return)
(1) A sealed certificate of return at an election in a prescribed form shall be issued within 14days to every candidate who has been retuned by the returning officer in an election under this Act:
Provided that where the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court being the final appellate court in any election petition , as the case may be, nullifies and candidate’s certificate of return, the Commission shall within 48 hours after receipt of the court’s order, issue the successful candidate with a valid certificate of return.
(2) Where the Commission fails, refuses, or neglects to issue the certificate of return under subsection (1), a certified true copy of the order of the court shall, by that very fact, be sufficient for the purpose of swearing-in a candidate declared as the winner of the election by that court.
Section 73 (Forms for use at elections)
(1) The forms to be used for elections under this Act shall be determined by the Commission
(2) An election conducted at a polling unit without the prior recording in the forms prescribed by the Commission of the quantity, serial numbers and other particulars of result sheets, ballot papers and other sensitive electoral materials made available by the Commission for the conduct of the election shall be invalid.
(3) A Presiding officer who intentionally announces or signs an election result in violation of subsection (2) commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine of N10,000,000 or imprisonment for a term of at leastone year or both.
NEXT WEEK: FEDERAL HIGH COURT (PRE-ELECTION) PRACTICE DIRECTIONS, 2022, issued by HON. JUSTICE JOHN TERHEMBA TSOHO, THE HONOURABLE, THE CHIEF JUDGE FEDERAL HIGH COURT OF NIGERIA, is being contravened with reckless abandon. Next week’s report will explain the danger this constitutes to a smooth election in 2023.
Vanguard